Surveillance Technology in Schools: The Battle Against Vaping

The burgeoning prevalence of vaping within educational institutions in the United States has emerged as a pressing concern, leading to the implementation of surveillance technology aimed at monitoring and apprehending students engaging in this behaviour. Educational establishments have allocated significant financial resources, including federal COVID-19 emergency relief funding, towards the procurement of sensors and cameras in response to the escalating usage of e-cigarettes among students, notwithstanding attempts to restrict sales to minors.

A prominent case involving the detection of student vaping through surveillance technologies pertains to Aaliyah Iglesias, a student at a high school in Texas. For Iglesias, the repercussions of being caught vaping were severe, imperilling her overall high school experience, including her role as student council president and her prospects of obtaining college scholarships. In addition to being sent to an alternative school for 30 days, she was cautioned about the potential of facing criminal charges.

Similar to Iglesias, numerous students nationwide have been impacted by the deployment of these monitoring technologies, often without their prior awareness. Many students have expressed astonishment upon learning of the existence of such technology in their educational institutions, as it is frequently undisclosed to them.

Despite the intention to deter vaping through these measures, students have devised methods to circumvent the sensors, such as encasing them in plastic wrap or exhaling vapour into their clothing. Some students have reported the prevalence of dense vape smoke within certain school bathrooms, resulting in the sensors being rendered ineffective due to the surfeit of alerts.

In response to the widespread issue of student vaping, corporations like HALO Smart Sensors have marketed their products to schools as a means of combating not only vaping, but also monitoring other concerns, including bullying and potential firearm-related incidents. The utilization of these sensors has been deemed an admissible expenditure of federal COVID-19 relief funds, premised on the monitoring of indoor air quality.

The repercussions for students caught vaping vary across distinct school districts, with certain institutions imposing stringent punitive measures, including criminal charges for students aged over 18. While the objective of the surveillance technology is to address a public health issue, apprehensions about privacy and the severity of disciplinary actions taken against students are on the rise.

Evidently, the issue of vaping within educational institutions is multifaceted and intricate, eliciting inquiries about the efficacy of surveillance technology and the ramifications of rigorous disciplinary measures. As educational institutions grapple with this challenge, it is imperative to deliberate upon the well-being of students and the ethical implications of such monitoring measures. It is apparent that the campaign against vaping within schools is far from concluded, and the use of surveillance technology presents both obstacles and ethical considerations that mandate judicious contemplation and evaluation.